Status and phase
Conditions
Treatments
About
Comparative analysis of the severity of Hand-Foot-Syndrome (HFS) of palms treated with brimonidine tartrate gel or with standard care Urea 10% containing lotion in cancer patients receiving antineoplastic therapy to show a preventive effect of cutaneous brimonidine treatment on severity of HFS symptoms.
Full description
Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is an adverse event frequently associated with the use of classical chemotherapeutic agents such as capecitabine or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, as well as targeted cancer drugs such as sorafenib or other tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. If the toxicity progresses edematous swelling, blistering and desquamation can lead to ulcerations of the palms and soles. Additionally, patients may be affected by nail-toxicities, such as discoloration, ridging, pitting up to complete onycholysis and pain. Today, cooling of hands and feet during infusion chemotherapy as well as preventive treatment with topical formulations containing urea 10% (e.g. Excipial U10 Lipolotion®) is considered as standard of care. Yet, these strategies are limited by intricateness, patient inconvenience and low efficacy. Hence, at this point the satisfactory treatment of HFS remains an unmet medical need, as until now, no effective therapy is available to prevent or reduce HFS symptoms during the cycle of chemotherapeutic treatment.
Recently, brimonidine 3 mg/g gel (Mirvaso®) has been approved as a topical treatment of facial erythema of rosacea in adult patients. Brimonidine is an effective agonist of α2-adrenoreceptors thereby, in analogy to skin cooling, leading to peripheral vasoconstriction.
Against this background, the following hypothesis was developed:
The topical application brimonidine 3 mg/g gel (Mirvaso®) may prevent or reduce the severity of HFS in cancer patients that receive respective antineoplastic agents.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
The following contraceptive methods with a Pearl Index lower than 1% are regarded as highly effective:
Oral hormonal contraception ('pill')
Vaginal hormonal contraception (NuvaRing®)
Contraceptive plaster
Long-acting injectable contraceptives
Implants that release progesterone (Implanon®)
Tubal ligation (female sterilization)
Intrauterine devices that release hormones (hormone spiral)
Double barrier methods: This means that the following are not regarded as safe: condom plus spermicide, simple barrier methods (vaginal pessaries, condom, female condoms), copper spirals, the rhythm method, basal temperature method, and the withdrawal method (coitus interruptus).
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
2 participants in 1 patient group
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal